# Llama 3.2 3B vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro

> MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.7 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 4.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/llama-3-2-3b-vs-mimo-v2-6-pro
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 3B scores higher in 0 categories and MiMo-V2.6-Pro in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where MiMo-V2.6-Pro leads 66.9 to 24.9.
- Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.33 per million input/output tokens, against $0.43 / $0.87 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro.
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Xiaomi |
| Noometry Index | 28.4 | 46.7 |
| Rank | 318 | 55 |
| Context | 131K | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $0.05 | $0.43 |
| Output $/M | $0.33 | $0.87 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Llama 3.2 3B: 27.1 (#314)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 53.2 (#27)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1098 | 1538 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1618 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 23.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 28.3% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Llama 3.2 3B: 19.9 (#135)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: —

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 21.9% | — |
| BALROG | 10.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Llama 3.2 3B: 20.1 (#225)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 30.4 (#76)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1095 | 1511 |

## Math

- Llama 3.2 3B: 29.9 (#213)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 37.9 (#91)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1126 | 1497 |

## Knowledge

- Llama 3.2 3B: 29.1 (#232)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 43.0 (#85)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1090 | 1548 |

## Multimodal

- Llama 3.2 3B: —
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 40.2 (#40)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1265 |

## Multilingual

- Llama 3.2 3B: 26.4 (#276)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 57.0 (#15)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1019 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1017 | 1532 |
| LMArena Russian | 949 | 1481 |
| LMArena German | 1056 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Llama 3.2 3B: 56.3 (#270)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 78.2 (#10)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1089 | 1490 |

## Long Context

- Llama 3.2 3B: 33.4 (#256)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 46.0 (#26)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1101 | 1500 |

## Writing & Preference

- Llama 3.2 3B: 24.9 (#302)
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro: 66.9 (#32)

| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 3B | MiMo-V2.6-Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1110 | 1491 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1094 | 1465 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1105 | 1463 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 595 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Llama 3.2 3B better than MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.7 to 28.4 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 3B costs 4.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when MiMo-V2.6-Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B or MiMo-V2.6-Pro?

Llama 3.2 3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.33 per million output tokens; MiMo-V2.6-Pro lists at $0.43 and $0.87.

### Is Llama 3.2 3B or MiMo-V2.6-Pro better for coding?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.2 versus 27.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.6-Pro does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 3B and MiMo-V2.6-Pro share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 3B has 18 scored results on Noometry and MiMo-V2.6-Pro has 14.